Assessment of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Pattern in the Intensive Care Unit Patients

IF 0.3 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Mahshid Aramesh, Mohammad Amin Valizade Hasanloie, S. Aghlmand, Hamdollah Sharifi
{"title":"Assessment of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Pattern in the Intensive Care Unit Patients","authors":"Mahshid Aramesh, Mohammad Amin Valizade Hasanloie, S. Aghlmand, Hamdollah Sharifi","doi":"10.37678/dcybd.2021.2825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: Stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is often overused in the intensive care unit. Evaluation of the rate of unsuitable stress ulcer prophylaxis upon ICU admission and determine the frequency of overutilization or underutilization of SUP. Study design: This study was performed in Imam Khomeini Hospital of Urmia University of Medical Sciences in Iran. The risk of stress ulcer development was assessed using American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) guideline. Materials and Methods: Patients with at least one major or two minor risk factors had an indication of receiving prophylactic stress ulcer. Stress ulcer prophylaxis was considered as appropriate if patients were in one of these two groups and receiving medication. Results: In total of 200 patients included in this study, 55.5% were male, mean hospitalization in ICU was 17.9±8.7 days. The mean age of patients was 56.1 ±17.4 years. Thirty two percent of patients had at least one major and 47.5% had at least two minor risk factors. The most common major risk factor was coagulopathy and the most minor risk factor was using heparin with therapeutic dose. Seventy-nine and a half percent of patients received stress ulcer prophylaxis based on guideline and forty-one (20.5%) had not any indication for stress ulcer prophylaxis and they received drugs inappropriately. The most commonly, used drug class in the prevention of stress ulcer was H2 blockers. Conclusions: Physicians are familiar with risk factors, but they are not familiar with the importance of rational prescription, and overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis. So, we are far from ideal conditions.","PeriodicalId":40137,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37678/dcybd.2021.2825","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is often overused in the intensive care unit. Evaluation of the rate of unsuitable stress ulcer prophylaxis upon ICU admission and determine the frequency of overutilization or underutilization of SUP. Study design: This study was performed in Imam Khomeini Hospital of Urmia University of Medical Sciences in Iran. The risk of stress ulcer development was assessed using American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) guideline. Materials and Methods: Patients with at least one major or two minor risk factors had an indication of receiving prophylactic stress ulcer. Stress ulcer prophylaxis was considered as appropriate if patients were in one of these two groups and receiving medication. Results: In total of 200 patients included in this study, 55.5% were male, mean hospitalization in ICU was 17.9±8.7 days. The mean age of patients was 56.1 ±17.4 years. Thirty two percent of patients had at least one major and 47.5% had at least two minor risk factors. The most common major risk factor was coagulopathy and the most minor risk factor was using heparin with therapeutic dose. Seventy-nine and a half percent of patients received stress ulcer prophylaxis based on guideline and forty-one (20.5%) had not any indication for stress ulcer prophylaxis and they received drugs inappropriately. The most commonly, used drug class in the prevention of stress ulcer was H2 blockers. Conclusions: Physicians are familiar with risk factors, but they are not familiar with the importance of rational prescription, and overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis. So, we are far from ideal conditions.
重症监护病房患者应激性溃疡预防模式的评估
目的:应激性溃疡预防(SUP)在重症监护病房经常被过度使用。评估ICU入院时不适当的应激性溃疡预防率,并确定SUP过度使用或未充分使用的频率。研究设计:本研究在伊朗乌尔米娅医科大学伊玛目霍梅尼医院进行。采用美国卫生系统药剂师协会(ASHP)指南评估应激性溃疡发展的风险。材料与方法:至少有一种主要或两种次要危险因素的患者有接受预防性应激性溃疡治疗的指征。如果患者属于这两组中的一组并接受药物治疗,则认为应激性溃疡预防是适当的。结果:本研究共纳入200例患者,男性占55.5%,平均ICU住院时间为17.9±8.7天。患者平均年龄56.1±17.4岁。32%的患者至少有一个主要的危险因素,47.5%的患者至少有两个次要的危险因素。最常见的主要危险因素是凝血功能障碍,最次要的危险因素是使用治疗剂量的肝素。79.5%的患者根据指南接受了应激性溃疡预防,41例(20.5%)患者没有任何应激性溃疡预防指征且用药不当。预防应激性溃疡最常用的药物是H2受体阻滞剂。结论:医师熟悉应激性溃疡的危险因素,但不了解合理处方的重要性,以及过度使用应激性溃疡预防药物。所以,我们离理想状态还很远。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Critical & Intensive Care
Journal of Critical & Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信